User talk:Binksternet/Archive6

Loma Prieta GA

I've left another round of concerns, be sure to get to them. ceranthor 12:57, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Help on Berreyesa DYK entries

Binksternet, Sorry I have been sick, and am only catching up today. I haven't seen what happened on this. To me your article is a complete, accurate and referenced synopsis of the available sources. A lot of strange things happened during the events of the Bear Flag Revolt and the stories of each of these events by themselves don't altogther ring true (the murder of the 2 Americans, the murder of Berreyesa, the involvement of Fremont, etc). Seems like you are between the rock of controversial (for the front page) facts in the sources and the hard place of doing your own original research. I also see that other editors have no substantive issues or improvements with your article. But Fremont is a big name, and I see the reason their caution.Emargie (talk) 03:53, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

As seen at Talk:Berreyesa_family#Questioning sources, the references were challenged because they rely heavily on self-published websites. The thing is, each of the referenced websites uses footnotes to show their scholarship, and of the sources I was willing to chase down, I noticed that the stories held up well. Whatever!

I'm glad you're feeling better. Take care of yourself! Binksternet (talk) 04:16, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Black project working group now live

You indicated during the proposal phase that you may be interest in a black project working group, this message is being left to inform you that the group has been officially created, and is located here if you would like to join. TomStar81 (Talk) 05:59, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Contest scoring change

I've realized there may be an issue with the scoring system, and I have a solution, which I've explained here. Feedback is requested. - Trevor MacInnis ^contribs 23:53, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Giorgi Latsabidze‎

I'd be grateful if you could have a look at this article. I am concerned about the general tone (Talk:Giorgi Latsabidze‎) and the lists used at the end of the article. Cheers!--Karljoos (talk) 00:43, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, too many lists. The author is working too hard to establish notability. Binksternet (talk) 00:51, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Rancho Cañada de Pogolimi

On September 7, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Rancho Cañada de Pogolimi, which you recently nominated. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

≈ Chamal ^talk ¤ 17:23, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

"..married at 14 and widowed at 17" - another good hook. Not as well documented as the Berreyesa page, but not as significant so it went through - after you fixed it up. ThanksEmargie (talk) 18:32, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Nominations open for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 12 September!
Many thanks,  Roger Davies ^talk 04:24, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Why are my links considered spam

You wrote - Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Screen Director's Playhouse. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Binksternet (talk) 18:37, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Sorry if my post is not 'kosher', but I'm still learning my way around here.

Can you please tell me why my external links are considered spam when they contain a wealth of information about old time radio in general, series in particular and much much more. I'm not posting these links just to drive people to these sites nor for Google purposes, they are for the purpose of providing the person who is interested in otr with a wider range of information. I would like to be able to post links and not have them considered spam. How can I do this? Beshires (talk) 01:09, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

The first place I saw your additions was at John R. Brinkley where you added three links to the top of the list of links that were already there:

• http://www.otrr.org The Old Time Radio Researchers home on the web.
• http://www.otrrlibrary.org The Old Time Radio Researchers FREE Library of downloadable old time radio broadcasts.
• http://www.otrrpedia.net. The Old Time Radio Researchers database of articles about programs and stars.

These three links have no instance of the name "Brinkley" on them. None whatsoever! The first link would only be appropriate on a Wikipedia page about Old Time Radio Researchers Group. The second link would only be appropriate at a Wikipedia article about OTRRpedia. The third link has a prominent "under construction" note which makes me hesitant to say it would appear anywhere, even at a Wikipedia page about OTRRLibrary. I looked at your edit history and found you had been putting these links in other places, and that makes them spam. Check out Wikipedia:External links to see what the guidelines are for such links. Binksternet (talk) 01:54, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Morale

It is my prerogative to correct issues where I see them, the same as it is with any other editor. i might say the same thing to you. - Don't replace the text about morale. Etrangere (talk) 21:29, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

That phrase is referenced, and under discussion on the Talk page, where a consensus appears to confirm its presence. Repeatedly removing it and its reference is vandalism. Binksternet (talk) 21:35, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm involved in the discussion on the talk page. It's not vandalism. It's a different pov, which is kind of what the editing process is about. Don't issue orders Binksternet. Also: Would you please improve your citations? They're incomplete. Etrangere (talk) 22:03, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Have you actually read the page: [Vandalism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:VAND] ? Be real. Etrangere (talk) 00:16, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

I am not trying to keep you from taking part in improving the article. I hit the "vandal" button on my user interface (Wikipedia:Twinkle) when I saw this two-edit diff of yours which shows a referenced phrase being deleted, one that was still under discussion on the talk page, at a point where I recalled that the latest consensus was Trekphiler and myself agreeing, against you, that the phrase should remain in the lede. That same diff of yours hit me wrong in further ways because it changed capital "Allied" to lower-case "allied", substituted the inferior, redundant phrase "combined allied" for the word "Allied", took out the italics of the foreign word Luftwaffe, and removed the defining term "far" from "far surpassing" where it was cited. The pair of edits appeared to me to be sheer retaliation rather than a measured move to improve. I apologize for not being more considerate. Binksternet (talk) 00:38, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Inverted gull wing

Hi, I added the above category to Kawasaki Ki-5 on the basis of the article content. Is the article is wrong? In this case it needs to be changed. --TraceyR (talk) 07:40, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I added the above category to Hawker Typhoon on the basis of the article content. Is the article is wrong? In this case it needs to be changed. --TraceyR (talk) 07:40, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I added the above category to Gloster IV on the basis of the article content. Is the article is wrong? In this case it needs to be changed. --TraceyR (talk) 07:47, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

When I get a chance in a few days I'll join the discussion regarding how much bend is required to be in the category. Binksternet (talk) 02:32, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

330th Bomb Group

Thank you for your input regarding the SB-29. Unfortunately it is incorrect in this particular case. During this time in WWII the SB-29 was not yet utilised in the theater. When I am referring to a SuperDumbo it is a standard issue B-29 that was outfitted with additional liferafts, supplies, radio's.., etc. that could be dropped to downed crews. Some of them did in fact carry the large boats strapped to the bomb bays but on 'off' days they flew typical bombing missions. Typically flightcrews would 'draw' this duty several times a month. Their aircraft would then be stripped of ammunition, bombs and loaded with addtional fuel tanks and rescue supplies. The SB-29 was developed post war and used by Air Sea Rescue and received the yellow striping etc which was typical of their aircraft. Again, thanks again, but i am going to remove your posted link as to avoid any confusion with the SB-29.

Thanks again! —Preceding unsigned comment added by B29bomber (talk • contribs) 14:10, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for the clarification! Binksternet (talk) 02:28, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Dumbo (air-sea rescue)

On September 11, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dumbo (air-sea rescue), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Wikiproject: Did you know? 18:28, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Air-sea rescue

On September 12, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Air-sea rescue, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Wikiproject: Did you know? 00:28, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Airborne lifeboat

On September 12, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Airborne lifeboat, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Wikiproject: Did you know? 12:28, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Haha, just noticed you added the 50 DYK medal to my awards page. Thanks for saving me the time of moving it over there. ;)--Giants27 (c|s) 21:56, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

		The 25 DYK Medal
		For your dedication to expanding articles for DYK. Cheers,--Giants27 (c|s) 22:01, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

LOL! Thanks! Binksternet (talk) 03:32, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLII (August 2009)

The August 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:12, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

new Wikiproject

Entincelles and I hope to create a new Wikiproject, entitled: Romantic Pianism. The project aims to improve and create pages about the Romantic Era of music. We would be delighted if you could show your support by signing your name on the proposal page and helping us to launch this project.--Pianoplonkers (talk) 16:06, 16 September 2009 (UTC) and -- Etincelles (talk), 5:04 pm, 16 September 2009 (UTC+1)

Good idea! My plate is too full right now to join another Wikiproject. Good luck! Binksternet (talk) 22:20, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

LP GA

How's it going, on terms of comprehensiveness? ceranthor 20:01, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Military history coordinator elections: voting has started!

Voting in the Military history WikiProject coordinator election has now started. The aim is to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on 26 September!
For the coordinators,  Roger Davies ^talk 22:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:3-Stooges.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:3-Stooges.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --Ken g6 (talk) 02:55, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Rancho Buena Ventura

On September 19, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Rancho Buena Ventura, which you recently nominated. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

NW (Talk) 16:07, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again for cleaning up this article, and getting it to DYK. I started another article on our friend Fremont's Rancho Las Mariposas.--Emargie (talk) 17:09, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

PBY Catalina

Hello,

I am interested do you get any message when article is edited, or how can one know when article is edited. As for edit, it was meant as test how long incorrect information allowed to be in inactive article - less than day it seems. Thank you for you participation and your aswer to this post. Special:Contributions/81.175.195.88 16:17, September 19, 2009 (UTC)

Read this: Help:Watching pages. Use the Wikipedia:Sandbox for your experiments. Sign your talk page entries with four tildes (~~~~.) Binksternet (talk) 16:31, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Well sandbox wouldn't have been good, because I wanted to experiment how long does it catch faulty errors. (~~~~.)

DYK for A-1 lifeboat

On September 21, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article A-1 lifeboat, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 16:07, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Speaker permanent magnet doesn't have to be magnetic!?

Can the permanent magnet be not magnetic at all? I.E. jsut iron; then it would be much easier to home make a speaker to your own preferences. Daniel Christensen (talk) 20:12, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Look; this cone and voice coil works when held up to anyhting iron: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dJKh2MYIjo It works as long as it's within a few inches of anyting metal. It's own basket; it's magnet; or the perm. magnet of another speaker. How? Daniel Christensen (talk) 20:17, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

The coil becomes the only magnet needed and it functions without a perm magnet. Why do both have to magnetic then, anyway? Daniel Christensen (talk) 20:17, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm not going to watch your youtube link but I can say that electromagnets have been used for speaker magnets from time to time since at least the 1920s but they always caused AC line buzz and hum to come out of the speaker. It's probably possible to fix that problem. Binksternet (talk) 20:23, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Listen; I'm not talking about the magnet structure being a permanent or electromagnet; I'm talking about it NOT being magnetic AT ALL. The voice coil and cone made noise (music with clarity but not bass) when held near any metal; any iron, or any magnet. It could not handle bass; it would get VERY hot, but what I'm asking is why does the magnet have to be a magnet. Why can't the voice coil be the only magnet and the perm magnet be just a hunk of iron? Daniel Christensen (talk) 20:29, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Honestly, I don't know. Binksternet (talk) 20:31, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Found it; efficiency; it's ~twice as efficient. Learn something new everyday. I want to build a speaker but don't want to be limited by some known-specified crap boughten magnet. That's what I hate about audio and everything now. It's not like yur gonna get any special or awesome result; you're using some corproate stooge mass-produced product that will only do so much-some known amount; and no more. I'm still just gonna use iron; a lot of it; and I have *endless* fine coated copper from TV yokes (practiacally a voice coil). I'll just go crazy big with everything and not aim for any sound quality-I really wasn't anyway; and just go for some crazy bass result; hopefully infrasound as I've never experienced it and all the weak shit everyone seems to have near me doesn't even compare to my crap Pyle 18's. Daniel Christensen (talk) 20:40, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Really, though, why the the unadultered arrogance regarding a 2 minute video exclusively illustrating the point? Daniel Christensen (talk) 20:45, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Chill out—my computer's sound gear is not hooked up right now. I can't listen to tunes or videos, though I could have watched it silently. Binksternet (talk) 20:48, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh all right. Yeah silently would pretty much not work. But I think it's a cool "discovery". Daniel Christensen (talk) 22:11, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Dispute regarding page undo's of my edits

Hi,

Thanks for getting in touch with your dispute regarding the page edits of:

• Frequency
• Pitch_(music)
• Q_factor
• Beats_per_minute
• Hertz

I agree with you that Frequency page has enough calculators already and your undo is fair enough. But I don't agree with your other comments for the other pages mentioned above. In some cases there are no other external links with useful tools for the subject.

I hope to gain your understanding on this matter as these subjects can be frustrating to people that aren't mathematically gifted and wiki is one of the first resources people look to for understanding complex subjects in laymans terms. I'm only trying to present simplicity for those who need it.

But don't get me wrong I understand that some people use wiki to spam their websites. These external links aren't against the guidelines. They are resourceful links which aid the understanding and calculation to the page's subject and would be beneficial to those that research these subjects. These links are pointing to the site www.musiccalculator.com which is a non-profit educational website which bares no advertisement or cookies.

Look forward to your response.

regards, PeterFlannery (talk) 16:48, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

My response is at User_talk:PeterFlannery#musiccalculator.com_links. See you there! Binksternet (talk) 17:15, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

musiccalculator.com links

Hi,

Thanks for your reply and advice. I agree it does need more textual reference in regards to how the calculations are done. That is part of the future plan for this website. So I will come back in a couple of months time when this site is older and holds a stronger reference point for each of these subjects.

Why you got an xml error seems to of been a temporary host issue which I saw myself and was only for 5-10 minutes. Funny how these things happen just when you need the site the most!.

All the best, PeterFlannery (talk) 14:35, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough. Good luck! Binksternet (talk) 14:42, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Rancho Las Mariposas

On September 23, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Rancho Las Mariposas, which you nominated. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

≈ Chamal ^talk ¤ 20:21, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

I liked the hook, but from the page statistics, looks like people are tired of Mr Fremont (or Ranchos ?). Thanks again-17:24, 24 September 2009 (UTC)Emargie (talk) 14:55, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

The hook wasn't very "hook-ey" as it told the whole story. The best hooks leave the reader flabbergasted so that they click on the link to satisfy a craving for further information. Binksternet (talk) 08:17, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Actually the page stats weren't updated when I checked yesterday - there were only 45 views, but now it is up to a more respectible 1k.14:52, 25 September 2009 (UTC)Emargie (talk) 14:55, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Urgent!

It is urgent that you add scientific material to the article, or it might fail GA and then will definitely be unable to pass FAC in time! ceranthor 11:59, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Ach! Yes, I am aware, but my September got incredibly busy and I haven't had the time needed for developing the article. I will devote a major portion of next week to the article. Binksternet (talk) 12:58, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Amphibious helicopter

On September 28, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Amphibious helicopter, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

≈ Chamal ^talk ¤ 12:42, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Chaplin and nazi propaganda

I am wondering whether that line you deleted today might just have been in the wrong section, and not vandalism. Are you familiar with the source that was cited? Abie the Fish Peddler (talk) 15:44, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

No, I'm not familiar. To me, www.jewornotjew.com looks like a self-published source—not a reliable source. Binksternet (talk) 15:48, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

I completely agree. However, the idea of this rumor of jewishness being associated with Chaplin being nazi propaganda sounded familiar so I searched for more detail and found the article on The Eternal Jew, a 1940 Nazi movie which includes footage of Chaplin. I want to rephrase the removed line without the reference used and somehow base it on the article of the movie. What do you think?

The only objection I had was with the reference. If the content is well supported, put it in. Binksternet (talk) 16:58, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Referencing YouTube

What do you think of this subject. I asked around; all over the place; citing sources, talk utube, talk ianmacm, ...etc.etc. and it seems it is appropriate at times. lol Remember how I put as a reference; "this user owns a Marantz HD77 or a Marantz 2235 or whatever, and you removed it? What about refencing a youtube video if it was technical, strictly pertainent, and objectionable (non-biased/advertising). Daniel Christensen (talk) 16:51, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

If the youtube video is from an expert source, you can use it for a reference. Binksternet (talk) 16:58, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

What if, and this pertains to pictures, too, it shows details, features or some other form of hard evidence of a fact? ex. "power consumption: 250 watts" Daniel Christensen (talk) 17:24, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

An Article for Deletion

Hi Binksternet, long time long see ;) I have requested a few AfDs, but it seems that no one is spending time reading them and helping come to consensus to keep or delete them anymore. I dunno, I guess everyone is busy doing their own thing, feel me? Anyways , do ya think you can take a look at this AfD and if you can take a position whatever it is will be so welcome. It might just be that it will be up to you to decide what to do with that article. Ok thanks and If you can take time to check it, great, if not, no problem. Take care. Jrod2 (talk) 11:25, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Marantz quality

Check this out, too. http://www.classic-audio.com/marantz/mfaq.html Scroll down to where it says "Why does a 35 watt Marantz sound better and louder than many 100 watt receivers?" Ha they use the Marantz 2235 that I happen to have. That I got at my dump as well as many other adequate/borderline monster receivers. Daniel Christensen (talk) 17:17, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm working on other things. Binksternet (talk) 17:24, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Le mediation terrible

I appreciate your recent remarks at Le mediation terrible. If you have the time, please consider adding to Arbitrary break 1, according to the message at the top of that section, "It might be helpful if links are given to the specific edits of articles (i.e. the diffs) by Stevertigo that are alleged to be improper." Thanks. --Bob K31416 (talk) 23:22, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

I thought the following advice from a message of Jayjg is worth considering, (see 01:16 16 Sep 2009 at [1])

Long exposure has taught me that every talk page discussion with him eventually comes to the question "Stevertigo, upon what sources do you base your opinions"? Constantly hammering on that statement usually makes him go away; unfortunately, in this case, many editors were unfamiliar with him, and gave him various openings to continue his digressions on his own unusual ideas.

--Bob K31416 (talk) 03:26, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Aerial torpedo

On October 2, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Aerial torpedo, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

—Ed (talk • contribs) 12:29, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIII (September 2009)

The September 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:07, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

1953 Iranian coup

Asking for help. I thought the article was making some progress on non-controversial areas but it was only because Kurdo777 had taken a break. Do you have any recommendations? --BoogaLouie (talk) 22:07, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Wow. I was hoping it would straighten out. No promises, but I might go over and look at it. Binksternet (talk) 02:52, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:Chotinermemo.jpg

File:Chotinermemo.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Chotinermemo.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Chotinermemo.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 15:26, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Keaton-OnceUponMattress.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Keaton-OnceUponMattress.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 22:45, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Edit warring - High fidelity: First warning

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on High fidelity. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. --> -->(KrodMandooon (talk) 11:55, 5 October 2009 (UTC))

Intangible article

Why I am not allowed to contribute to Nikola Tesla article. I didn't wrote anything wrong. And, why you deleted a picture? And why not put correct name - Croatian Military Frontier was a part of Military Frontier, formed by the Kingdom of Hungary in the late 16th century. Please respond. --Kebeta (talk) 19:39, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

This is not a radical view, it is a normal approach to put correct data on the subject. --Kebeta (talk) 19:43, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Another question: why did you add the conjecture which begins "It is curious that Nikola Tesla, a pioneer of AC systems, was born approximately 100 km north of Šibenik..."? That has been taken out before because it is not high value information. Binksternet (talk) 19:48, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't know what is the purpose of this question, but I will answer it for you. I created an article Jaruga Hydroelectric Power Plant, and looking for sources, I found the connection of Jaruga and Nikola Tesla. After I finished with Jaruga, I put it in Nikola Tesla article. You can check it if you want. As for high value information - you don't seriously think that this giant article is all about high value informations. --Kebeta (talk) 19:58, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

You put your finger on the problem: the article is very large—too large. Low value information should be trimmed away. Binksternet (talk) 20:15, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Why something that Tesla did in America is notable, and what he did in Croatia is not? Even so, what is wrong with correct info that doesn't take space. Croatian Military Frontier was a part of Military Frontier, formed by the Kingdom of Hungary in the late 16th century. This part of the Military Frontier included the geographic regions of Lika, Kordun, Banovina and bordered the Adriatic Sea to the west, Venetian Republic to the south, Habsburg Croatia to the west, and the Ottoman Empire to the east. And, Nikola Tesla was born in Lika.--Kebeta (talk) 20:25, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

For example, Petrovaradin was part of Military Frontier, and it is located today in Serbia. Why you deny more precise information. Anyway, Vojna Krajina is Croat word, why use it in English wiki?--Kebeta (talk) 19:25, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Take this to Talk:Nikola Tesla. All I want to say is that a very delicate balance has been achieved between Serbs and Croats at the Tesla article, and I will work to preserve the balance. Binksternet (talk) 20:37, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Excuse me, but you reverted me, you put a tag on my talk page which can be interpreted as I am a vandal. That is why we are having a conversation right now. I am sure that your intentions are positive, and that you are trying to the best thing for the article. But, saying that "She was talented in making home craft tools and memorized many Serbian epic poems, but never learned to read" is more important than correct birth place or mention of ...a pioneer of AC systems.. is funny. I am not saying anything bad about Serbs, nor I think badly about them. I am going to revert it, and if there will be some questions on talk page, I'll be glad to answer them. --Kebeta (talk) 21:08, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

You said vandal, I did not—all I did was go to your talk page and ask you to stop throwing off the balance of the article. That bit about "pioneer of AC systems" is just conjecture by one man. It is not worthy of this very rich, very long article. We don't need filler. Binksternet (talk) 21:45, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

O.K. If you can not modify it to fit into the article properly - delete it, or if you want, I will. Regards. --Kebeta (talk) 21:59, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Edit warring - High fidelity: Second warning

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on High fidelity. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. --> -->

You might want to check out the wiki sections on hypothesis testing before continuing to post falsehoods onto wiki. Please do not replace accurate content with inaccurate information, irrespective of whether you manage to rustle up a false reference for it. Wiki does not operate on the David Irving principle. It is an encyclopedia - content should be accurate. Please also resolve this issue on the Transparency (data compression) page before posting again here. Thanks. (KrodMandooon (talk) 08:06, 6 October 2009 (UTC))

I'm looking forward to reading the references you find. Until then, the five references I have at Transparency (data compression) trump the zero references that were there before I jumped in. Binksternet (talk) 14:14, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

You are welcome to add as many fact tags as you want ... but please don't add falsehoods to wikipedia, nor remove valid content. Thanks.(KrodMandooon (talk) 09:02, 10 October 2009 (UTC))

Riverside International Automotive Museum

Hi Binksternet. You seem you have a lot of experience with DYK articles. Would you mind reviewing the article I self nominated as a DYK, Riverside International Automotive Museum? Even if it isn't worthy of a DYK, I would be interested in your feedback. It is the first article I have proposed as a DYK. Thank you. MissionInn.Jim (talk) 02:05, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Submarine

I think you accidentally reverted my edits where you meant to revert the anonymous ones. Would you mind reversing that, please. DJ Clayworth (talk) 15:41, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

I was in the middle of restoring your much better version when you beat me to it. Binksternet (talk) 15:44, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Another restore would be much appreciated. I've reverted the article enough times already. DJ Clayworth (talk) 15:47, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Edit war at Submarine

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Submarine. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. --70.114.162.236 (talk) 16:53, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

File:LucyStone 50c.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:LucyStone 50c.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 16:54, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

I am withdrawing this deletion nomination as, on closer investigation, it is confirmed that this stamp is actually a public domain image. I have modified the image to reflect this fact. ww2censor (talk) 21:02, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Leading edge (disambiguation)‎

Thanks for creating this dab page - it was well time for it! - Ahunt (talk) 11:54, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Sure thing! Binksternet (talk) 19:29, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Edit warring - High fidelity: Final warning

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on High fidelity. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. --> -->

--

I must confess to being a bit concerned about Binksternet's conduct on the High fidelity page. You started out by trying to impose a formally false definition of transparent on high fidelity, which was the opposite of the wiki definition. Then you tried to change the wiki definition at transparent to be the opposite of what is correct, and tried to justify same by adding some sloppy and false references, and then when that failed and was rejected, you returned to the high fidelity page, and now appear to insist on trying to impose falsehood on wiki. This pattern is clearly not productive nor helpful, and this issue may need to be escalated if it continues. You are welcome to add as many fact tags as you want ... but please don't add falsehoods to wikipedia, nor remove valid content. Thanks. (KrodMandooon (talk) 09:01, 10 October 2009 (UTC))

You say I am welcome to add as many fact tags as I want, but in this edit of yours, four fact tags are taken out without the indicated problem being fixed. Binksternet (talk) 14:49, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

If you want to add fact tags, add as many you like. But please don't use "added fact tag" as a pretense to remove swathes of valid encyclopedia content. (KrodMandooon (talk) 06:07, 11 October 2009 (UTC))

Loma Prieta

I trust you realize that the article is not going to make FA in time? Best, ceranthor 23:33, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I acknowledge that fact. Between the GA nomination and now, I was saddled with WAY too many work assignments. I just don't have the time to make the GA pass. Binksternet (talk) 05:02, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Feminism

Please do not delete my contribution to the Feminism article just because you disagree. I have backed up my statement with a reliable source. I am a feminist for life, and a significant minority within the Feminist movement are pro-fetal life. Please go to http://www.feministsforlife.org/ for more information. My information is sourced, relevent and truthful. Please do not delete my contribution to the Feminism article just because you disagree. I have backed up my statement with a reliable source. I am a feminist for life, and a significant minority within the Feminist movement are pro-fetal life. Please go to http://www.feministsforlife.org/ for more information. My information is sourced, relevent and truthful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Boromir123 (talk • contribs) 15:06, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Feminists have done a wide variety of things. Individually, some of them have taken courses of political action that are not closely aligned with feminism as a whole. The article is about the whole. Binksternet (talk) 15:10, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Mark Peattie

I planned to write an article about this American academic, but I thought it made sense to create links in the articles which already mentioned him or his work. The process turned out to be a little cumbersome after the first forty articles; but there you have it. --Tenmei (talk) 10:11, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

It is not easy to write a good biography about an academic and an author. Me, I have a funny connection to Peattie: I know his daughter socially as we both are interested in dancing to Argentine tango, and we both live in the same geographical region. I have never met Mark R. Peattie, but I'm sure that if I did, it would be a very interesting visit. Binksternet (talk) 22:37, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Netania Davrath

I'm willing, but a bit hesitant. I've never started an article (though I've contributed to many). I bought her two-record long-playing set when it came out in the early '60's. It got quite a bit of exposure on WQXR at the time and was well-reviewed. (See this link, for example.) http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2002/July02/Canteloube_Davrath.htm She gets considerable praise also in this review of a rival version; http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/nov99/canteloube.htm

In case you're interested in acquiring the recording: http://www.arkivmusic.com/classical/album.jsp?album_id=75761 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kostaki mou (talk • contribs) 04:12, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

I haven't been able to find out that much about her life yet except that she was born in Ukraine in 1931 and died in 1987. Her family emigrated with her to Israel in 1948. She studied with, among others, the great Jennie Tourel. She made other classical and folk recordings.

Convinced?

Kostaki mou (talk) 04:03, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

I have known for a few years now that she made a recording of the Chants d'Auvergne, but I would like some evidence that this was an important recording. Binksternet (talk) 04:09, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Check the links I gave you. They ought to convince you. Kostaki mou (talk) 05:20, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Hypersonic effect

You might want to come join the discussion at hypersonic effect. (KrodMandooon (talk) 15:33, 13 October 2009 (UTC))

Fair to use Google street view screenshots on Wikipedia?

Could I take a screenshot or a photo of my screen of a street view image and use it on Wikipeida??? MANY useful article pictures could be made this way... Daniel Christensen (talk) 03:25, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

I doubt it. I think Google owns the rights. Ask Google to be sure. Binksternet (talk) 05:11, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Never underestimate paint!!!/loudspeaker enclosure

Haha look at this nice center channel illustration from my barn theater.

File:Center channel.jpg

• Also, how about this for a picture for the article loudspeaker enclosure? Daniel Christensen (talk) 03:49, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

The hand-drawn L-Center-R is pretty amateurish, and the dirty screen is awful. The enclosures are better, and could be a good match for the article. Binksternet (talk) 04:02, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Dude it wouldn't let me make a text box; I've never seen that; and here's someithng; if you want that picture to replace the one of the boss speakers with the china cabinet and the tablecloth; you do it lol. Because it's so funny how I'll like purposely consult me; you'll say not to and I'll just do it. Daniel Christensen (talk) 05:09, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh yeah, and the tiny projo TVis not the screen it's just a shelf; the DeLuxe projection screen and construction paper (LoL to the max) is the screen. To the right you see the strip of three sheets of contruction paper had fallen down; dusty wood and tape don't mix.

Daniel Christensen (talk) 05:09, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

See here is the frame I built for the wind factor and see how the sides are solid for full backing of the construction paper screen extensions?

You should really watch at least one of my videos for it; or at least go to my Flickr page. http://www.flickr.com/photos/36290595@N02/ Daniel Christensen (talk) 05:15, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

PSS oh yeah; and paint is refering to microsoft paint. Daniel Christensen (talk) 05:20, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Insufficient coverage

The term "total system power" has been used in more places than just home stereos and home theater systems. It has been used in:

• Computer equipment
  • http://electronicdesign.com/Articles/ArticleID/18325/18325.html
  • http://www.actel.com/documents/Power_PIB.pdf
  • http://www.picmg.org/pdf/SHBExpress/PowerIssuesinEdgeCardSystems.pdf
  • http://www.green500.org/docs/tutorials/tutorial.pdf
  • http://books.google.com/books?id=xCSioBW4xZwC&pg=PA165&lpg=PA165&dq=%22total+system+power%22
• Public electric utility analysis
  • http://www.energy.ca.gov/2009publications/CEC-200-2009-010/CEC-200-2009-010-CMF.PDF
  • http://www.islandenergy.com/files/PowerContentLabel2009.pdf
• Various electronic devices
  • http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=4342172

This article as it stands has no good references for the term "total system power" as it is used in the field of consumer audio electronics. There should be a source that discusses the term as used by various manufacturers, but none is supplied. Binksternet (talk) 18:08, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

I got an idea; instead of bitching; do this massive revolutionary thing and EDIT THE ARTICLE; seeing as how you found all these "great" sources; and I'm sure they are; just like with the loudspeaker enclosure Photo :

• I uploaded a better one and put it on your talk page; but I will not put it on the article; I'll let you do it. Daniel Christensen (talk) 18:23, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Invitation to Mediation

Because we are at an impasse with respect to your edits of the Behringer page, and have been unable to resolve this matter informally, I feel that it is now appropriate to invoke formal mediation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation/Behringer EdatBehringer (talk) 23:00, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Mediation Notification

A request for formal mediation of the dispute concerning Behringer has been filed with the Mediation Committee (MedCom). You have been named as a party in this request. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Behringer and then indicate in the "Party agreement" section whether you would agree to participate in the mediation or not.

Mediation is a process where a group of editors in disagreement over matters of article content are guided through discussing the issues of the dispute (and towards developing a resolution) by an uninvolved editor experienced with handling disputes (the mediator). The process is voluntary and is designed for parties who disagree in good faith and who share a common desire to resolve their differences. Further information on the MedCom is at Wikipedia:Mediation Committee; the policy the Committee will work by whilst handling your dispute is at Wikipedia:Mediation Committee/Policy; further information on Wikipedia's policy on resolving disagreements is at Wikipedia:Resolving disputes.

If you would be willing to participate in the mediation of this dispute but wish for its scope to be adjusted then you may propose on the case talk page amendments or additions to the list of issues to be mediated. Any queries or concerns that you have may be directed to an active mediator of the Committee or by e-mailing the MedCom's private mailing list (click here for details).

Please indicate on the case page your agreement to participate in the mediation within seven days of the request's submission.

Thank you, EdatBehringer (talk) EdatBehringer (talk) 18:37, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Midget submarine images

The problem is that the two images are of exactly the same place.©Geni 18:43, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

That's true. The one in color shows the submarines half concealed in rusty water. The monochrome image shows the submarines in a more lethal light, ranked and ready for delivery. Me, I prefer the monochrome image. Binksternet (talk) 18:47, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

However it loses impact through being a B&W image.©Geni 19:09, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Both color and B&W images can have "impact". It really depends on the story being told. If the emphasis of the article is on the offensive lethality of a large fleet of midget submarines, the black and white image suits. If the story to be told emphasizes the last-ditch desperation of the midget submarine strategy, the rusty water image suits. Binksternet (talk) 21:01, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Bohemian Club, Bohemian Grove, & their cats

I noticed that you re-added the Bohemian Club category to the Bohemian Grove article. The end result of your change is that the Bohemian Grove article is now in the Bohemian Club category twice—once for the Bohemian Club category itself, and again for the Bohemian Grove category. That's why I removed it in the first place. Is there a reason it needs to be duplicated, or should I revert it back? Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 08:05, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

I am not understanding how categories work—I never have, quite—so perhaps it will help to know that some of the articles under the Bohemian Grove category have every bit of relevance to the Bohemian Club category as well. For instance, regarding the List of Grove Plays, the plays are conceived, selected, written and rehearsed at the Bohemian Club building in San Francisco before they ever travel north to the Bohemian Grove. It's confusing. Binksternet (talk) 16:37, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Let me see if I can help clarify things a bit… All these articles used to be in one category: Category:Bohemian Club. That led to some articles being in categories that they shouldn't be in, e.g., Bohemian Grove in San Francisco-based categories. In order to fix this:

• I created a new category: Category:Bohemian Grove.
• I removed the Club category from all the articles that solely had to do with Category:Bohemian Grove.
• I added the Grove category to all articles that solely had to do with Category:Bohemian Grove.
• I added the Grove category to the Club category, making the Grove category a subset of the Club category. This re-added all the Grove articles back into the Club category.

The result is:

Grove-related articles    >    Category:Bohemian Grove    >    Category:Bohemian Club

Because of this, articles need to be in one category or the other so we don't have duplication. And this way, we can apply other categories that only apply to the Grove (such as Category:Sonoma County, California) to Category:Bohemian Grove instead of having to add them separately to each individual Grove-related article.

Hope this helped! Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 00:40, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

On the category page Category:Sonoma_County,_California, why do you want to have Bohemian Grove appear "above the fold" as a subcategory rather than below as a page in category? Binksternet (talk) 14:31, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

I just think it's simpler to have the Category:Bohemian Grove (note: not the same as the article Bohemian Grove) as a subcategory of the Category:Sonoma County, California rather than have Bohemian Grove and Cremation of Care and List of Grove Plays as separate articles under that same category. It's the same way that Bohemian Club and List of Bohemian Club members are articles within the Category:Bohemian Club, and so, do not need to be separately listed under Category:Traditional gentlemen's clubs in the United States or Category:Clubs and societies in the United States.

As to ending up "above the fold;" well, that's the way the software shows which category members are subcategories and which are articles. There shouldn't be any implication of importance (or lack thereof); it's just a side-effect of the way the category pages are displayed. Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 04:18, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for taking care of the details! Binksternet (talk) 04:20, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Notability of unbuilt buildings and structures

Hi Binksternet, following our discussion here, I wonder if you'd let me know your thoughts on the notability of this article. Thanks. Pondle (talk) 11:55, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback, I've added a template to the article and started a discussion on its talk page. Pondle (talk) 16:21, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Bose stereo speakers

Thanks for the comment on Talk:Bose stereo speakers#Notable?. I've started an AfD on all of the Bose spinoff articles. Feel free to voice your opinion here. Snottywong (talk) 00:15, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

You bet I will! Binksternet (talk) 01:54, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Bose is overblown. I don't like the company or anything to do with it. And as a side story when I was in a Bose store I wanted to see any specs or freQ response and they said "Bose does not publish any frequency responses". What bullshit. Bose is a company that got lucky and got an undeservedly credible name; people buy bose just to say they have a bose. bose blows. no highs no lows must be bose. Daniel Christensen (talk) 23:05, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Scientology in Germany

Could you have a look at the article again, please? [2] --JN466 10:36, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Scratch that, another editor has sorted it. Best, --JN466 10:46, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Stubborn

So you won't change the loudspeaker enclosure to the better one I put here? lol you told me not to put the Boss one there that I made with the china cabinet and the tablecloth and I did it anyway; now you admit the MTX photo is better but you won't change it will ya. Won't lower yourself down...... down to my level, down to the ground.....Daniel Christensen (talk) 22:49, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't see why I should do your work for you. Of course I could replace the photo, but you can too. Why bother me with it? Binksternet (talk) 23:08, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

In the beginning: when I first uploaded it; I KNEW it was betterl; i just pretend suggested it to you and pretend asked if it would be better; just to see if you would do it because it was YOU who bitched about the Marantz HD77 picture and YOU who bitched about the boss one with the tablecloth and china cabinet. Daniel Christensen (talk) 23:11, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Hey why do companies like Toft Audio Designs have links and mentions in articles but their parent companies (PMI Audio) do not? I see it all the time. Daniel Christensen (talk) 22:49, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

So why do they? Daniel Christensen (talk) 23:11, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

• Bose is overblown. I don't like the company or anything to do with it. And as a side story when I was in a Bose store I wanted to see any specs or freQ response and they said "Bose does not publish any frequency responses". What bullshit. Bose is a company that got lucky and got an undeservedly credible name; people buy bose just to say they have a bose. bose blows. no highs no lows must be bose. Daniel Christensen (talk) 23:05, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Do you share the general dislike for Bose as well? Daniel Christensen (talk) 23:12, 29 October 2009 (UTC)